[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH] libvirt, logging: cleanup VIR_DEBUG0() VIR_INFO0() VIR_WARN0() VIR_ERROR0()



Is this OK?  "fmt..."

#define high_level_api(fmt...) low_level_api(fmt)

On 05/10/2011 11:29 PM, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 05/10/2011 08:52 AM, Eric Blake wrote:
>> On 05/09/2011 03:24 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
>>> These VIR_XXXX0 APIs make us confused, use the non-0-suffix APIs instead.
>>>
>>> How these coversions works? The magic is using ##.
>>> #define high_levle_api(fmt, ...) low_levle_api(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>> When __VA_ARGS__ is empty, "##" will swallow the "," in "fmt," to avoid compile error.
>>
>> ##__VA_ARGS__ is a GNU extension; it does not work on all C99 compilers.
>>
>> I'm worried that this is not portable.
> 
> But, we CAN do:
> 
> #ifdef __GNUC__
> # define high_level(fmt, ...) low_level(fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
> #else
> # define PP_NARG(...) \
>          PP_NARG_(__VA_ARGS__,PP_RSEQ_N())
> # define PP_NARG_(...) \
>          PP_ARG_N(__VA_ARGS__)
> # define PP_ARG_N( \
>           _1, _2, _3, _4, _5, _6, _7, _8, _9,_10, \
>          _11,_12,_13,_14,_15,_16,_17,_18,_19,_20, \
>          _21,_22,_23,_24,_25,_26,_27,_28,_29,_30, \
>          _31,_32,_33,_34,_35,_36,_37,_38,_39,_40, \
>          _41,_42,_43,_44,_45,_46,_47,_48,_49,_50, \
>          _51,_52,_53,_54,_55,_56,_57,_58,_59,_60, \
>          _61,_62,_63,N,...) N
> # define PP_RSEQ_N() \
>          63,62,61,60,                   \
>          59,58,57,56,55,54,53,52,51,50, \
>          49,48,47,46,45,44,43,42,41,40, \
>          39,38,37,36,35,34,33,32,31,30, \
>          29,28,27,26,25,24,23,22,21,20, \
>          19,18,17,16,15,14,13,12,11,10, \
>          9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1,0
> # define VIR_DEBUG(...) VIR_DEBUG ## PP_NARG(__VA_ARGS__) (__VA_ARGS__)
> # define VIR_DEBUG1(xxx) xxx
> # define VIR_DEBUG2(xxx, xxx) xxx
> ...
> # define VIR_DEBUG63(xxx, ..., xxx) xxx
> #endif
> 
> suitably expanded (and we can also place a cap on the maximum number of
> arguments we ever expect to see in VIR_DEBUG, rather than going all the
> way to the C99 limit of 63).
> 
> Thanks to:
> https://groups.google.com/group/comp.std.c/browse_thread/thread/77ee8c8f92e4a3fb/346fc464319b1ee5
> for the idea.
> 
> Yeah, it's gross, but we limit the grossness to one header, and the rest
> of the code is more maintainable as a result.
> 


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]